W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-soap-jms@w3.org > September 2008

RE: Open items...

From: Peter Easton <peaston@progress.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:32:25 -0400
Message-ID: <3712271BEF30D74CBEA9E827CD9ABDBD01BD2C34@MAIL03.bedford.progress.com>
To: "Eric Johnson" <eric@tibco.com>, "SOAP/JMS (list)" <public-soap-jms@w3.org>

I would say that Eric has put together a good summation. 


-----Original Message-----
From: public-soap-jms-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-soap-jms-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Eric Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 6:17 PM
To: SOAP/JMS (list)
Subject: Open items...

Just because I was going crazy trying to keep this all clear in my head,
I pulled together items from a variety of email threads.  It might be
presumptive of me to think that this might identify the topics for our
next meeting....

  * TextMessage - how do we support it?
    - What I think we've agreed on:
      * Clients can send either TextMessage or BytesMessage [1]
      * In a request/response MEP the response MUST match the message
        format of the request [1]
      * No changes needed to URI scheme [1]
    - Open issues
      * What do we need to say about TextMessages, attachments, and
        base64 encoding? (no reference - just noticed this)
      * Do we standardize in a WSDL how to flag use of TextMessage?
        yes [3], or no [1]
  * Is WSDL portion of specification normative? [2]
    - whatever the collective decision, text needs to be improved
      for clarity of our intent
  * What changes do we want for the URI spec?
    - Agreed upon changes:
      * Suggestions from Alfred H (no URL).
    - Open items:
      * Update proposal [6] for queue & topic variants - how to address
        reply address? Also eliminate "context" variant. (action from
        weekly call)
  * Specifying additional JNDI parameters, [4] & [5]
    - Should these JNDI items go into the URI? [7]
    - Do we need to worry about non-String JNDI values? Answer - don't
      think so.
  * Do we want to allow for setting arbitrary JMS headers? [8]



[1] - Email from Phil of 2008-09-23:

[2] - Email from Roland of 2008-09-25:

[3] - Email from Peter of 2008-09-23:

[4] - Email from Derek of 2008-09-22

[5] - Email from Eric of 2008-09-22

[6] - Email from Eric of 2008-09-22

[7] - Email from Peter of 2008-09-22

[8] - Email from Peter of 2008-09-25
Received on Friday, 26 September 2008 14:36:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:24:44 UTC